IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON

DIVISION II

STATE OF WASHINGTON, No. 54714-7-II

Respondent,

v.

JOHN CARRIE BENJAMIN, UNPUBLISHED OPINION

Appellant.

VELJACIC, J. — John C. Benjamin appeals his sentence for bail jumping, arguing that the 

trial court erred in requiring him to sign his judgment and sentence and for not giving him 15 days 

credit for time served. Because Benjamin has completed his sentence, there is no further relief 

this court can provide. Accordingly, we dismiss Benjamin’s appeal as moot. 

FACTS

Benjamin pled guilty to bail jumping in October 2019. Benjamin’s standard sentence 

range was 3-to-8 months. The State agreed to recommend 3 months. 

On February 12, 2020, the trial court sentenced Benjamin to 6 months, with his sentence 

starting that day. Benjamin requested additional time to put his affairs in order before starting to 

serve his sentence. The court informed Benjamin that he already had time for that and denied his 

request. Frustrated by the court’s response, Benjamin refused to sign the judgment and sentence. 

The court scheduled a follow up hearing to give Benjamin time to consult with his attorney and 

decide whether to sign the judgment and sentence. 

Filed

Washington State

Court of Appeals

Division Two

December 14, 2021
54714-7-II

2

On February 27, 2020, Benjamin continued to express his frustration to the trial court over 

his sentence. The court added another month to Benjamin’s sentence. Ultimately, the court 

sentenced Benjamin to 7 months with credit for 4 days served. Benjamin appeals. 

ANALYSIS

Benjamin contends that the trial court erred in requiring him to sign the judgment and 

sentence and not giving him 15 days credit for time served. The State responds that this matter is 

moot because Benjamin has served his sentence. We agree with the State. 

An appeal is moot if we no longer can provide effective relief. State v. Ingram, 9 Wn. App. 

2d 482, 490, 447 P.3d 192 (2019). However, we have discretion to decide a moot appeal if the 

case involves a matter of continuing and substantial public interest. In re Detention of M.W., 185 

Wn.2d 633, 648, 374 P.3d 1123 (2016). In determining whether a moot appeal falls within this 

exception, we consider the public or private nature of the issue presented, the need for an 

authoritative determination that will provide future guidance to public officers, and the likelihood 

that the issue will recur in the future. Id.

In this case, the trial court’s response to Benjamin’s frustrations with his standard range 

sentence and his refusal to sign the judgment and sentence is not a public question; the question 

will probably not recur; and it is a matter of discretion that would not benefit from guidance. 

Therefore, we decline to exercise our discretion to consider Benjamin’s moot appeal. The proper 

recourse in such circumstance is to dismiss. State v. Sansone, 127 Wn. App. 630, 636, 111 P.3d 

1251 (2005).

We dismiss Benjamin’s appeal as moot. 
54714-7-II

3

A majority of the panel having determined that this opinion will not be printed in the 

Washington Appellate Reports, but will be filed for public record in accordance with RCW 2.06.040, 

it is so ordered.

Veljacic, J.

We concur:

Maxa, P.J.

Price, J.